Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Just Call Them Nons: The New Testament Did.
As I was proof-reading the Latin for our upcoming bible, I came across this term which I've confirmed occurs nowhere else in scripture: Non gentem (negation + people). Typically written lowercase, the Nova Vulgata strangely capitalises as if a proper name.
It is discussing those outside the body corporate (congregation) of God, called Israel, which the NT refers to as Nons (specifically non-people). As the body corporate of God is the White race this refers to non-whites.
RE: Just Call Them Nons.
As I was proof-reading the Latin for our upcoming bible, I came across this term which I've confirmed occurs nowhere else in scripture: Non gentem (negation + people). Typically written lowercase, the Nova Vulgata strangely capitalises as if a proper name.
It is discussing those outside the body corporate (congregation) of God, called Israel, which the NT refers to as Nons (specifically non-people). As the body corporate of God is the White race this refers to non-whites.
Romans 10:19
…Ego ad aemulationem vos adducam per
Non gentem
…
…I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are
non-people
…
🔥13⚡2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Merry Christmas!
The time of year anti Christian detractors spread falsehoods regarding Christmas and it's Christian origin.
Jesus Christ is Lord.
Jesus was White.
Jesus was born Dec, 25th ᴬᴰ1.
As blackpilling as times can get, I hope everyone takes the time to reconnect with loved one's and enjoy this time of year.
RE: Annual 2024 — 2023 — 2022 — 2021 — 2020 — 2019
— Origins of Yule
— Zeitgeist Debunked
— Dec 25th Info Resource
— Independent Dating
— Awassi Sheep
— Born Dec 25th
The time of year anti Christian detractors spread falsehoods regarding Christmas and it's Christian origin.
Jesus Christ is Lord.
Jesus was White.
Jesus was born Dec, 25th ᴬᴰ1.
As blackpilling as times can get, I hope everyone takes the time to reconnect with loved one's and enjoy this time of year.
⚡11❤6🙏1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Wawa Runestone Canada:
Several months ago, it was revealed a Runestone had been discovered in Canada. What is interesting is it is the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13) carved in runes.
It however isn't ancient, and is post-colonial. Written in modern Swedish, in the runic pattern of the 1611 Runa ABC boken by Johannes Bureus; likely the 1733 print and dated to shortly after.
This is the oldest Runestone found in North America, and a testament to the Christian virility of early Americans.
RE:
— Ancient White Americans
— ANE admixture in Amerindians
— Baptism of Early Virginia
— Early American, Proto Christian Identity
— Manifest Destiny: American White ethnoplanet policy
Several months ago, it was revealed a Runestone had been discovered in Canada. What is interesting is it is the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13) carved in runes.
It however isn't ancient, and is post-colonial. Written in modern Swedish, in the runic pattern of the 1611 Runa ABC boken by Johannes Bureus; likely the 1733 print and dated to shortly after.
This is the oldest Runestone found in North America, and a testament to the Christian virility of early Americans.
ᚠᛆᚦᛅᛦ ᚢᚮᛦ ᛋᚮᛘ ᛆᛋᛐ ᛁ
ᚼᛁᛘᛚᚢᛘ ᚼᛚᚴᛅᚦ ᚠᛆᚱᚦᛅ ᚦᛁᛏ
ᚿᛆᛘᚿ ᛬ ᛐᛁᛚᚴᚮᛘᛘᛅ ᚦᛁᛏ ᚱᛁᚴᛁᛅ ᛫ ᛋᚴᛁᛅ
ᚦᛁᚿ ᚢᛁᛚᛁᛅ ᛋᚮ ᛋᚮᛘ ᛁ ᚼᛁᛘᛘᛆᛚᛆᚿ
ᛋᚮ ᚬᚼ ᛒᚮ ᛁᚮᚱᛑᛆᚿᚿᛅ ᛫ ᚠᚮᚱᛐ
ᛑᛆᚼᛚᛁᚼᛆ ᛒᚱᚮᚦ ᚴᛁᚠ ᚮᛋ ᛁ ᛑᛆᚼ
ᚮᚼ ᚠᚮᛦᛚᛆᛐ ᚮᛋ ᚢᚮᚱᛆ ᛋᚴᚢᛚᛑᛅ-
ᛋᚮ ᛋᚮᛘ ᚮᚼ ᚢᛁ ᚠᚮᛦᛚᛆᛐᛅ ᚦᛅᛘ
ᚮᛋ ᛋᚠᚢᛚᛑᛁᚼᛁ ᛆᚱᛅ ᛫ ᚮᚼ
ᛁᚿᛚᛅᚦ ᚮᛋ ᛁᚴᚴᛁᛅ ᛁ
ᚠᚱᛅᛋᛐᛆᛚᛋᛆᚿ ᛫ ᚢᛐᛆᚿ ᚠᚱᛅᛚᛋ
ᚮᛋ ᛁᚠᚱᛆ ᚮᚿᛑᚮ ᛫ ᛐᚢ ᚱᛁᚴᛁᛆᚦ ᛆᚱ
ᚦᛁᛏ ᚬᚼ ᛘᛆᚼᛐᛆᚿ ᚮᚼ
ᚼᛆᚱᛚᛁᚼᚼᛅᛐᛅᚿ ᛁ ᛅᚠᛁᚼᚼᛅᛐ ᛫
ᛆᛘᛆᚾ
⚡6❤1
Forwarded from Apostolic Nations
Timeline of Full Preterist Eschatology.png
3 MB
Timeline of Full Preterist Eschatology:
Here's a condensed timeline of eschatology according to the Full Preterist view, which is central in RP theology. Eschatology is the study of the last days, which we understand not as being the "end of the world", but the transition from the Old Covenant/Old Earth/Old Heavens to the New Covenant/New Earth/New Heavens, all fulfilled in the 1st century AD, as per the words of Our Lord (Matthew 16:28).
Credit to Henry from @RestoredPuritanism2, @Preterism and @A1488Xian for participating in this project.
Here's a condensed timeline of eschatology according to the Full Preterist view, which is central in RP theology. Eschatology is the study of the last days, which we understand not as being the "end of the world", but the transition from the Old Covenant/Old Earth/Old Heavens to the New Covenant/New Earth/New Heavens, all fulfilled in the 1st century AD, as per the words of Our Lord (Matthew 16:28).
Credit to Henry from @RestoredPuritanism2, @Preterism and @A1488Xian for participating in this project.
🔥2
Forwarded from Apostolic Nations
A few important notes regarding this post:
1) I placed Jesus's birth in 2 BC based on revised chronology, details are available at dec25th.info Jesus's birth was indeed on December 25th, but in 2 BC, not in AD 1; our calendar is slightly shifted due to miscalculations in the Middle Ages. Also, this matches perfectly with Jesus's age reported in Luke 3:23, being 30 years old when He began His ministry, which is commonly dated in AD 28-29.
2) Artaxerxes's concessions to Ezra might have been in 457 or 458 BC, the dating isn't known with precision. I put ~455 BC to have an exact 490 years match with AD 35 (a very solid estimation for the date of Philip's ministry in Samaria, the first time the Gospel was preached to non-Israelites), however if it turned out to be not exactly 490 years, this shouldn't be an issue: the match is still very close.
3) Jesus's baptism and beginning of ministry likely occurred in late AD 28 or early AD 29; making Jesus 30 years old, since He was born in December of 2 BC. I put AD 28 for clarity and making the 30 year match exact, but it might have been AD 29.
4) Technically, Nero was the fifth emperor of Rome, not the sixth, because modern historiography considers Augustus to be the first emperor, not Caesar; however, Caesar ruled the whole Roman world, concentrated all powers in his hands, ended the Roman Republic and was deified after his death; moreover, the Roman emperors were not officially "kings" anyway. So in biblical eschatological terms, I think it's safe to assume that Julius Caesar is the first "king", not Augustus: therefore Nero is the sixth king, rising after five are fallen. Nero is also commonly referred to as the "sixth Caesar".
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
20260122 beasts.png
3.2 MB
Beasts of the Field:
Another Trad-CI superstition that collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
Unfortunately common claims by many non-Reformed-CI include:
—claiming Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are two separate creation events, the former of which are Nons (6/8th Day Creationism).
—claiming Beasts of the Field refer to Nons.
Shown in the infographic:
—the parallel between Genesis 1 and 2, demonstrating they are of the same event (Adam); akin to the retelling between Gospels.
—the human behavioural references to Beasts of the Field, use a word specifically for quadruped animals and not ambiguously open to bipedal hominids; and don't connect to Genesis creation wording.
RE: Biblical Christian Identity:
—Spiritual Israel
—Triune God
—Cain, a Son of Adam
—Jewish Ethnogenesis
—White Ethnogenesis
—Biblical Genealogy
—Who is Israel?
Relevant Posts:
—What is the Bible?
—Biblical Geographic Extent
—Pinnacle of Creation
—Noahs White Sons
—Arab ⁻²
—Simian ⁻²
—Troglodyte
Another Trad-CI superstition that collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
Unfortunately common claims by many non-Reformed-CI include:
—claiming Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are two separate creation events, the former of which are Nons (6/8th Day Creationism).
—claiming Beasts of the Field refer to Nons.
Shown in the infographic:
—the parallel between Genesis 1 and 2, demonstrating they are of the same event (Adam); akin to the retelling between Gospels.
—the human behavioural references to Beasts of the Field, use a word specifically for quadruped animals and not ambiguously open to bipedal hominids; and don't connect to Genesis creation wording.
🔥3
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
20260122 beasts.png
3.2 MB
Beasts of the Field:
Another Trad-CI superstition that collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
Unfortunately common claims by many non-Reformed-CI include:
—claiming Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are two separate creation events, the former of which are Nons (6/8th Day Creationism).
—claiming Beasts of the Field refer to Nons.
Shown in the infographic:
—the parallel between Genesis 1 and 2, demonstrating they are of the same event (Adam); akin to the retelling between Gospels.
—the human behavioural references to Beasts of the Field, use a word specifically for quadruped animals and not ambiguously open to bipedal hominids; and don't connect to Genesis creation wording.
RE: Biblical Christian Identity:
—Spiritual Israel
—Triune God
—Cain, a Son of Adam
—Jewish Ethnogenesis
—White Ethnogenesis
—Biblical Genealogy
—Who is Israel?
Relevant Posts:
—What is the Bible?
—Biblical Geographic Extent
—Pinnacle of Creation
—Noahs White Sons
—Arab ⁻²
—Simian ⁻²
—Troglodyte
Another Trad-CI superstition that collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
Unfortunately common claims by many non-Reformed-CI include:
—claiming Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are two separate creation events, the former of which are Nons (6/8th Day Creationism).
—claiming Beasts of the Field refer to Nons.
Shown in the infographic:
—the parallel between Genesis 1 and 2, demonstrating they are of the same event (Adam); akin to the retelling between Gospels.
—the human behavioural references to Beasts of the Field, use a word specifically for quadruped animals and not ambiguously open to bipedal hominids; and don't connect to Genesis creation wording.
🔥2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Long Live The Empire:
White survival is unity and expansion.
2 Maccabees 13:14
RE:
— America's White Ethnoplanet Policy
— Manifest Destiny
— European Union: Project Europa
— An Imperative
— Infinite Habitat
White survival is unity and expansion.
2 Maccabees 13:14
Committing himself therefore to the Creator of all the world, he exhorted his soldiers that they should fight valiantly even unto death for the laws, the church, the city, the fatherland, and the state, and he encamped around Modin. — Committens itaque omnium Creatori mundi, exhortatus suos milites, ut fortiter dimicarent usque ad mortem pro legibus, templo, civitate, patria, republica, circa Modin castra posuit.
⚡11❤2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Preterism— Against Jewish Fables of the End:
They're weaponising Historicist/ Futurist Eschatology to deceive White men to die for Israel in a secular war.
This war is not about defending Christianity, it is not about defending Whites; these are not signs of the End-Times. It is a secular regional war about toppling the last major player between Israel and regional hegemony: paving the way to Israel as a global superpower.
They will do and say ANYTHING to make you fight and die with religious zeal: as if the universe depends on it.
Do not believe the Jewish fables.
RE:
— Preterist Eschatology Timeline
— Full Preterism
— Partial Preterism
— Orthodox Full Preterist Apologia
— No One Is Coming To Save Us
— Inherently Racist and Anti-semitic
Channels:
— @Preterism
— @ApostolicNations
— @RP_HQ
Scripture:
— Not heeding Jewish fables and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. [Titus 1:14]
— False Christs and prophets will appear. Do not believe nor go to them. [Matthew 24:23-24; Mark 13:5-6; Luke 21:8]
They're weaponising Historicist/ Futurist Eschatology to deceive White men to die for Israel in a secular war.
This war is not about defending Christianity, it is not about defending Whites; these are not signs of the End-Times. It is a secular regional war about toppling the last major player between Israel and regional hegemony: paving the way to Israel as a global superpower.
They will do and say ANYTHING to make you fight and die with religious zeal: as if the universe depends on it.
Do not believe the Jewish fables.
🔥9⚡2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
KJNV— Project:
When completed, will be the first full CI bible ever produced; containing: Old Testament, Apocrypha & New Testament.
In both Latin & English: providing a textual basis to translate into other languages and preserve a textual/ semantic benchmark for far future English revisions.
Modelled on the Nova Vulgata: indexation, book inclusion, textual inclusion, variant selection & semantic choices based on the KJV, have heavily revised the Latin.
Creating a textual basis that could reproduce the KJV whilst circumventing dated, obsolete & archaic English wording: once again making the racial elements of the bible visible again and preserving it in timeless Latin.
Refrained from releasing a PDF throughout, until we're at a comfortable stage; which we are nearing.
OT/AP is mostly complete and NT nearly fully refined (our goal for initial release).
Live access to KJNV has been possible throughout with @cxbbot however.
Comment words or verses for me to double check, to make sure we got it right!
When completed, will be the first full CI bible ever produced; containing: Old Testament, Apocrypha & New Testament.
In both Latin & English: providing a textual basis to translate into other languages and preserve a textual/ semantic benchmark for far future English revisions.
Modelled on the Nova Vulgata: indexation, book inclusion, textual inclusion, variant selection & semantic choices based on the KJV, have heavily revised the Latin.
Creating a textual basis that could reproduce the KJV whilst circumventing dated, obsolete & archaic English wording: once again making the racial elements of the bible visible again and preserving it in timeless Latin.
Refrained from releasing a PDF throughout, until we're at a comfortable stage; which we are nearing.
OT/AP is mostly complete and NT nearly fully refined (our goal for initial release).
Live access to KJNV has been possible throughout with @cxbbot however.
Comment words or verses for me to double check, to make sure we got it right!
🔥9❤2👎1
Forwarded from Victorian Dawn
☦️ The Most Misunderstood Story
You may have seen the plethora of memes from pagans talking about David "stealing" the Philistine's foreskins (1 Sam. 18:25-27). I will present to you the most compelling argument that using "foreskins" there is a mistranslation, a very long-standing one, and that David actually was taking their heads.
→ BEGIN
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
You may have seen the plethora of memes from pagans talking about David "stealing" the Philistine's foreskins (1 Sam. 18:25-27). I will present to you the most compelling argument that using "foreskins" there is a mistranslation, a very long-standing one, and that David actually was taking their heads.
→ BEGIN
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
👍5⚡1
Forwarded from Victorian Dawn
☦️ The Most Misunderstood Story II
We must first understand what word is being used for "foreskin" here. That is "orlah" (6190)[1] which means "foreskin" or "[a state of being] uncircumcised".
It doesn't primarily mean foreskin. That's what lexicons will tell you but they're wrong. You can check every time the word is used in the Bible and it only means foreskin if the context makes it obvious, or if there's a preceding word like "basar" (1320)[2] meaning "flesh".
The primary meaning is metaphorical. The Greek equivalent ἀκροβυστία[3], used in the Septuagint and New Testament, also follows this pattern. The only instance of it actually meaning a literal foreskin is in Col. 2:13, where τῆς σαρκὸς ("of the flesh") is added to clarify.
You might ask why the Vulgate translated orlah as præputia then[4] — a purely anatomical version of orlah. The issue comes from Jerome. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, what would be called the Latin Vulgate.
When he did so, he consulted the Septuagint — a prior Greek translation — and some scholars of Hebrew. As I explained in an earlier post, circumcision became very different after the Bar Kokhba revolt. Jerome likely assumed that this rabbinic practice reflected the original Israelite tradition, and carried this misunderstanding directly into his translation. As a result, ambiguous covenantal terms like orlah were locked into a purely anatomical reading (præputia).
→ NEXT
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
We must first understand what word is being used for "foreskin" here. That is "orlah" (6190)[1] which means "foreskin" or "[a state of being] uncircumcised".
It doesn't primarily mean foreskin. That's what lexicons will tell you but they're wrong. You can check every time the word is used in the Bible and it only means foreskin if the context makes it obvious, or if there's a preceding word like "basar" (1320)[2] meaning "flesh".
The primary meaning is metaphorical. The Greek equivalent ἀκροβυστία[3], used in the Septuagint and New Testament, also follows this pattern. The only instance of it actually meaning a literal foreskin is in Col. 2:13, where τῆς σαρκὸς ("of the flesh") is added to clarify.
You might ask why the Vulgate translated orlah as præputia then[4] — a purely anatomical version of orlah. The issue comes from Jerome. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, what would be called the Latin Vulgate.
When he did so, he consulted the Septuagint — a prior Greek translation — and some scholars of Hebrew. As I explained in an earlier post, circumcision became very different after the Bar Kokhba revolt. Jerome likely assumed that this rabbinic practice reflected the original Israelite tradition, and carried this misunderstanding directly into his translation. As a result, ambiguous covenantal terms like orlah were locked into a purely anatomical reading (præputia).
→ NEXT
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
👍3
Forwarded from Victorian Dawn
☦️ The Most Misunderstood Story III
We see many instances in 1 and 2 Samuel of the Philistines being called uncircumcised in a derogatory manner (1 Sam. 14:6, 17:26, 17:36, 31:4, 2 Sam. 1:20, 1 Chron. 10:4) and outside of Samuel in Judges (Judg. 14:3, 15:18). The excessive citations are to prove a point: being uncircumcised was bad in the eyes of the Israelites and grounds to be made fun of.
When Israelites took war trophies, they were heads (Judg. 7:25). In fact, when David killed Goliath (1 Sam. 17:51) and when the son of Saul was killed (2 Sam. 4:8), both times the heads were cut off! All of this is to say that Saul's request of foreskins would be a very weird concept to David. Yet his hesitation or confusion was never mentioned.
And again, circumcision was different. David would have understood anatomically what Saul wanted, but this would be an entirely foreign idea. That makes the idea that David returned with 200 foreskins even less likely. But if it were heads, there's no issue.
The word orlah in 1 Sam. 18:25-27 was just a way to refer to the Philistines as a group as uncircumcised. Grammatically, the Hebrew simply says 'the orlot of the Philistines,' referring to something associated with the uncircumcised Philistines. It doesn’t have to be foreskins.
In unpointed Hebrew, עָרְלָה (arla, “foreskin”) and עָרֶפָּה (arepa, “neck”) differ only by two consonants (ל vs. פ) and vowel pointing. It could've been a scribal error.
→ NEXT
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
We see many instances in 1 and 2 Samuel of the Philistines being called uncircumcised in a derogatory manner (1 Sam. 14:6, 17:26, 17:36, 31:4, 2 Sam. 1:20, 1 Chron. 10:4) and outside of Samuel in Judges (Judg. 14:3, 15:18). The excessive citations are to prove a point: being uncircumcised was bad in the eyes of the Israelites and grounds to be made fun of.
When Israelites took war trophies, they were heads (Judg. 7:25). In fact, when David killed Goliath (1 Sam. 17:51) and when the son of Saul was killed (2 Sam. 4:8), both times the heads were cut off! All of this is to say that Saul's request of foreskins would be a very weird concept to David. Yet his hesitation or confusion was never mentioned.
And again, circumcision was different. David would have understood anatomically what Saul wanted, but this would be an entirely foreign idea. That makes the idea that David returned with 200 foreskins even less likely. But if it were heads, there's no issue.
The word orlah in 1 Sam. 18:25-27 was just a way to refer to the Philistines as a group as uncircumcised. Grammatically, the Hebrew simply says 'the orlot of the Philistines,' referring to something associated with the uncircumcised Philistines. It doesn’t have to be foreskins.
In unpointed Hebrew, עָרְלָה (arla, “foreskin”) and עָרֶפָּה (arepa, “neck”) differ only by two consonants (ל vs. פ) and vowel pointing. It could've been a scribal error.
→ NEXT
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
👍1
Forwarded from Victorian Dawn
☦️ The Most Misunderstood Story IV
Josephus in his Antiquities mentions David taking heads, not foreskins, five times (Ant. 6.197, 6.203, 7.25)*. This doesn't have to be Josephus' hiding the truth. The Greeks (who he wrote for) were not moral puritans about this type of stuff, the Israelites were. There's three chapters going extensively over sexual purity laws in Leviticus (Lev. 18-20).
Some insist that Saul's request for foreskins was gruesome and gross precisely to scare David off. Yet again, this makes no sense considering David returned with 200. Then you might say this was the only way Philistines and Israelites could be differentiated, that's why foreskins had to be collected. But evidently, Philistines could be separated from Israelites (1 Sam. 17:26, 17:36). This argument also doesn't account for the fact it could be anyone's foreskin. Or that there was no separation of foreskin from the penis with Israelite circumcision. A foreskin also doesn't even imply a killing blow.
The last one, a bit less common, suggests that it was a sort of humiliation of the Philistines for not having the practice of circumcision. But if humiliation of the Philistines was the goal, why give such a glorious act to David?
Instead, the most logical and simple answer is that David was requested to bring back 100 heads. David, having no actual army, maybe a small group of supporters, were outnumbered. Saul hoped this would kill David. But David returned with 200 heads and embarrassed him.
Lastly, 1 Sam 29:4 is an oddity for those who follow the mainstream translation. The Philistines remark that David would take their heads to Saul to make up with him — why not mention the foreskins? Wouldn't it be notable enough to associate with David?
*Not a comprehensive citation
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
Josephus in his Antiquities mentions David taking heads, not foreskins, five times (Ant. 6.197, 6.203, 7.25)*. This doesn't have to be Josephus' hiding the truth. The Greeks (who he wrote for) were not moral puritans about this type of stuff, the Israelites were. There's three chapters going extensively over sexual purity laws in Leviticus (Lev. 18-20).
Some insist that Saul's request for foreskins was gruesome and gross precisely to scare David off. Yet again, this makes no sense considering David returned with 200. Then you might say this was the only way Philistines and Israelites could be differentiated, that's why foreskins had to be collected. But evidently, Philistines could be separated from Israelites (1 Sam. 17:26, 17:36). This argument also doesn't account for the fact it could be anyone's foreskin. Or that there was no separation of foreskin from the penis with Israelite circumcision. A foreskin also doesn't even imply a killing blow.
The last one, a bit less common, suggests that it was a sort of humiliation of the Philistines for not having the practice of circumcision. But if humiliation of the Philistines was the goal, why give such a glorious act to David?
Instead, the most logical and simple answer is that David was requested to bring back 100 heads. David, having no actual army, maybe a small group of supporters, were outnumbered. Saul hoped this would kill David. But David returned with 200 heads and embarrassed him.
Lastly, 1 Sam 29:4 is an oddity for those who follow the mainstream translation. The Philistines remark that David would take their heads to Saul to make up with him — why not mention the foreskins? Wouldn't it be notable enough to associate with David?
*Not a comprehensive citation
𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐰𝐧
👍2
Victorian Dawn
☦️ The Most Misunderstood Story You may have seen the plethora of memes from pagans talking about David "stealing" the Philistine's foreskins (1 Sam. 18:25-27). I will present to you the most compelling argument that using "foreskins" there is a mistranslation…
1 Samuel 18:25 —
1 Samuel 18:26 —
1 Samuel 18:27 —
2 Samuel 3:14 —
from NV { Dixit autem … habet necesse rex sponsalia … praeputia … tradere David in manibus … } with MT { ויאמר … אין חפץ למלך במהר … ערלות … להפיל את דוד ביד פלשׁתים׃ } with RHLXX { καὶ εἶπεν … ἀκροβυστίαις … } to { Et dixit … vult rex dotem … stipraeputia … ut caderet David manu … }: AOT: see 2 Samuel 3:14 for “stipraeputia”.
1 Samuel 18:26 —
from NV { … renuntiassent … verba, quae dixerat Saul, … sermo in oculis David, ut fieret gener regis. Et … impleti, } with MT { ויגדו … הדברים האלה … דוד להתחתן במלך … } with RHLXX { … ῥήματα ταῦτα … } with SP { … ܘܰܫܦܰܪ … ܚܰܬܢܳܐ ܠܡܰܠܟܳܐ. … } to { … nuntiarunt … haec verba, … David bene esse generum regis: et … impleti. }: AOPT.
1 Samuel 18:27 —
from NV { cum … abiit cum viris, qui sub eo erant, … attulit praeputia … gener eius. Dedit itaque … } with MT { ויקם … וילך הוא ואנשׁיו … ויבא דוד את ערלתיהם … להתחתן במלך … } with SP { ܘܩܳܡ … ܚܰܬܢܳܐ ܠܡܰܠܟܳܐ. ܘܝܰܗܒ ܠܶܗ … } to { Unde … et abiit, ipse et viri eius, … David attulit stipraeputia … gener regis. Et Saul dedit … }: AOPT: “unde” used to smooth between “et” and “cum” across the versions, see 2 Samuel 3:14 for “stipraeputia”.
2 Samuel 3:14 —
from NV { Misit autem … Saul … praeputiis … } with CV { … Saul, … } with RHLXX { καὶ … } to { Et misit … Saul, … stipraeputiis … }: AOPT:
Josephus Antiquitates Judaicae b6 { … [197] … ἂν ἑξακοσίας μοι κομίσῃ κεφαλὰς τῶν πολεμίων … [201] … Παλαιστίνων δὲ τιμωρίαν καὶ κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν ἑξακοσίας … [203] … Δαυΐδῃ, κτείνας πολλοὺς καὶ κεφαλὰς ἑξακοσίων ἀποτεμὼν ἧκε πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα … [210] … καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα κομίσαντα μὲν ὅσας ἐπετάχθη κεφαλὰς τῶν ἐχθρῶν … [374] … Παλαιστῖνοι τοὺς τῶν πολεμίων νεκροὺς ἐπιτυγχάνουσι τοῖς Σαούλου καὶ τῶν παίδων αὐτοῦ σώμασι καὶ σκυλεύσαντες ἀποτέμνουσιν αὐτῶν τὰς κεφαλάς … }, Josephus Antiquitates Judaicae b7 { … [25] τοῦ δὲ Δαυίδου ποιησαμένου τὰς ὁμολογίας, ἥσθη γὰρ ἐφ᾽ οἷς Ἀβεννῆρος διεπρεσβεύσατο πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ πρῶτον τεκμήριον παρασχεῖν τῶν συνθηκῶν ἀξιώσαντος ἀνασώσαντα πρὸς αὐτὸν Μελχάλην τὴν γυναῖκα μεγάλοις ὠνηθεῖσαν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ κινδύνοις καὶ Παλαιστίνων κεφαλαῖς ἑξακοσίαις, ἃς ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς ἐκόμισε τῷ πατρὶ Σαούλῳ, … }:
Neologism “stipraeputia” (stipendium praeputia) coined to capture unique intended nuance of a conceptual tally. Stipraeputia allows a conceptual “tally / payment / dowry / scalp / head / counted military war-trophy / proof of victory” whilst preserving foreskin as a potential real countable object and real spoken words. With support from Josephus' parallel text; the passages reflect an idiom equivocal to the common idiom “collect 200 heads/ scalps” used: figuratively for required kills, or physically for cranial collection using foreskin as a colloquialism of targetted groups, or literally for foreskin collection.
👍2❤1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Idiom Lost:
A common Old Testament contention is when king Saul demands a dowry of 100 Philistine foreskins and David delivers 200, to marry his daughter Michal.
Due to modern sensitivities, many are squeamish to the idea of anatomical collection, especially of the given appendage. However it's not an issue even if literal: collecting proof of kills that the enemy have and your people don't.
This however isn't quite what it seems. If we look at the parallel text Josephus Antiquities 6:197,203. 7:25 the Greek instead says "heads". Supporting this was understood as an idiom equivocal to the common idiom "collect 200 heads/ scalps" denoting a required count rather than collection (US literally paid to scalp Amerindians).
Given this, we are considering using stipraeputia (stipendium praeputia) to signal the intended semantic of a countable martial tally, whilst preserving the literal speech. Giving range for literal (foreskin), euphemistic (head) and figurative (tally).
RE: Most Misunderstood Story (4 parts).
A common Old Testament contention is when king Saul demands a dowry of 100 Philistine foreskins and David delivers 200, to marry his daughter Michal.
Due to modern sensitivities, many are squeamish to the idea of anatomical collection, especially of the given appendage. However it's not an issue even if literal: collecting proof of kills that the enemy have and your people don't.
This however isn't quite what it seems. If we look at the parallel text Josephus Antiquities 6:197,203. 7:25 the Greek instead says "heads". Supporting this was understood as an idiom equivocal to the common idiom "collect 200 heads/ scalps" denoting a required count rather than collection (US literally paid to scalp Amerindians).
Given this, we are considering using stipraeputia (stipendium praeputia) to signal the intended semantic of a countable martial tally, whilst preserving the literal speech. Giving range for literal (foreskin), euphemistic (head) and figurative (tally).
👍4
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Surrexit Dominus Vere.
Truly the Lord has risen.
Luke 24:34
Truly the Lord has risen.
Luke 24:34
❤20
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Have Children:
Not only is it a duty to our people, it fulfills and brings you joy.
RE: Please take the time to check previous great posts on the topic.
—What it means to be a Puritan
—Manifest Destiny
—Never lose sight
—Which way White man?
—Where's yours?
—Where are you?
—Work towards it
—Hope and Future
—Stop making excuses
—Tobit 4:12
—Ghost Beach
—Non TFR
—TFR Change
—5 Year Plan
—Be Fruitful and Multiply
—Demographics is Destiny
—Christian Fertility Success
—Replacement Fertility
—Consolidation Caveat
—You are the only obstacle
—Fertility Windows
—Conquer it Again
—Oriental TFR
—Lean into it
—Demography
—Race Suicide
—Roman Christian Success
—Hispanic TFR
—Population Forecast
—Six Generations
—Amish TFR
—Oriental Immigration
—Do Your Part
—Billion White Americans
—Japanese Open Borders
—Obedient Son
—14 Words
—Non TFR to Zero
—Net Fertility Rate
Not only is it a duty to our people, it fulfills and brings you joy.
❤11
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseparable.
Ancestral God:
Despite romanticisations of simple obscure localised mystified naturalist fables being the ideal for our ancestral faith and God; the Christian God has been that for all living memory. Experiencing unfathomable circumstances in this period.
Europeans have been Christian much before:
—Inca Empire
—Aztec Empire
—Maori New Zealand settlement
—Zulu South Africa migration
—Horses introduced to America
—English, German, Spanish and French (etc) languages (crafted from Christian influence)
—All modern European ethnicities
—Icelandic settlement
—Germanic settlement of British Isles
—North/ South American, African and Australian settlement
—White man landing on the moon
Through all of this, we worshipped our ancestral God: Jesus Christ.
Despite romanticisations of simple obscure localised mystified naturalist fables being the ideal for our ancestral faith and God; the Christian God has been that for all living memory. Experiencing unfathomable circumstances in this period.
Europeans have been Christian much before:
—Inca Empire
—Aztec Empire
—Maori New Zealand settlement
—Zulu South Africa migration
—Horses introduced to America
—English, German, Spanish and French (etc) languages (crafted from Christian influence)
—All modern European ethnicities
—Icelandic settlement
—Germanic settlement of British Isles
—North/ South American, African and Australian settlement
—White man landing on the moon
Through all of this, we worshipped our ancestral God: Jesus Christ.
🔥6